Notice2024-20633
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change to Amend its Fee Schedule
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
September 12, 2024
Issuing agencies
Securities and Exchange Commission
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 89 Issue 177 (Thursday, September 12, 2024)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 177 (Thursday, September 12, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 74321-74324]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2024-20633]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-100959; File No. SR-CboeEDGX-2024-055]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc.; Notice
of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change to
Amend its Fee Schedule
September 6, 2024.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on August 26, 2024, Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``EDGX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
\2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change
Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``EDGX Options'')
proposes to amend its Fee Schedule. The text of the proposed rule
change is provided in Exhibit 5.
The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the
Exchange's website (<a href="http://markets.cboe.com/us/options/regulation/rule_filings/edgx/">http://markets.cboe.com/us/options/regulation/rule_filings/edgx/</a>), at the Exchange's Office of the Secretary, and at
the Commission's Public Reference Room.
II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.
A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
1. Purpose
The Exchange proposes to amend its fee schedule for its equity
options platform (``EDGX Options'') relating to logical connectivity
fees.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The Exchange initially filed the proposed fee change on
January 2, 2024 (SR-CboeEDGX-2024-006). On March 1, 2024, the
Exchange withdrew that filing and submitted SR-CboeEDGX-2024-017. On
April 30, 2024, the Exchange withdrew that filing and submitted SR-
CboeEDGX-2024-023. On June 28, 2024, the Exchange will be
withdrawing that filing and submitting SR-CboeEDGX-2024-040 On
August 26, the Exchange withdrew that filing and submitted this
filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
By way of background, the Exchange offers a variety of logical
ports, which provide users with the ability within the Exchange's
System to accomplish a specific function through a connection, such as
order entry, data receipt or access to information. The Exchange
currently assesses, among other things, the following logical port
connectivity fees on a monthly basis: $500 per port for Logical Ports;
\4\ $500 per port for Multicast PITCH Spin Server Ports (``Spin
Ports'') and GRP Ports; \5\ and $600 per port for Ports with Bulk
Quoting Capabilities \6\ (``Bulk Ports''). The Exchange proposes to
increase the monthly fees for the forgoing ports to the following
rates: $750 per port for Logical Ports, Spin Ports and GRP Ports and
$1,000 per port for Bulk Ports. The Exchange notes the proposed fee
change better enables it to continue to maintain and improve its market
technology and services. Additionally, the proposed fee amounts for
Logical Ports, Spin Ports and GRP Ports are the same as the fees
assessed on two of the Exchange's affiliated options exchanges for the
same corresponding logical connectivity and the proposed fee amount for
Bulk Ports is even lower than the fees assessed by the same affiliated
options exchanges for the same corresponding Bulk Port connectivity.\7\
The proposed fees are also in line with amounts assessed by other
exchanges for similar connections, including the Exchange's affiliated
options exchanges.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Logical Ports include FIX and BOE ports (used for order
entry), drop logical port (which grants users the ability to receive
and/or send drop copies) and ports that are used for receipt of
certain market data feeds.
\5\ Spin Ports and GRP Ports are used to request and receive a
retransmission of data from the Exchange's Multicast PITCH data
feeds.
\6\ Bulk Quoting Capabilities Ports provide users with the
ability to submit and update multiple bids and offers in one message
through logical ports enabled for bulk-quoting.
\7\ See Cboe Options Exchange Fee Schedule, Logical Connectivity
Fees, which assesses a monthly fee between $750-$800 per port for
Logical Ports, Spin Ports, $750 per port for GRP Ports and between
$1,500-$3,000 per port for Bulk Ports and see Cboe BZX Options
Exchange Fee Schedule, Options Logical Port Fees and Cboe Exchange
Fees Schedule, Logical Connectivity Fees, which assesses a monthly
fee of $750 per port for Logical Ports, Spin Ports and GRP Ports and
between $1,500-$2,500 per port for Bulk Ports.
\8\ See, e.g., The Nasdaq Stock Market Options Pricing Schedule,
Section 3 Nasdaq Options Market--Ports and Other Services, which
assesses a monthly fee of $650 per port for FIX Ports, which is
analogous to the Exchange's Logical Ports, up to $1,500 per port for
SQF Ports which are similar functionality as the Exchange's Bulk
Ports. See also BOX Exchange LLC (``BOX'') Fee Schedule, Section
III, B. (Technology Fees), which assesses up to $500 per port per
month for FIX Ports which are analogous to the Exchange's Logical
Ports and $1,000 for Market Making SOLA Access Information Language
(``SAIL'') Ports which are analogous to the Exchange's Bulk Ports.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Statutory Basis
The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act'') and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular,
the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\9\ Specifically, the
Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \10\ requirements that the rules of an exchange be
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation
and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing,
settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating
transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest. Additionally,
the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
[[Page 74322]]
the Section 6(b)(5) \11\ requirement that the rules of an exchange not
be designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers,
brokers, or dealers. The Exchange also believes the proposed rule
change is consistent with Section 6(b)(4) \12\ of the Act, which
requires that Exchange rules provide for the equitable allocation of
reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its Members and other
persons using its facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
\10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
\11\ Id.
\12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange believes the proposed fees are reasonable as they are
the same, or even lower than, the amounts assessed by affiliated
options exchanges for the same functionality (and which were similarly
adopted via the rule filing process and filed with the Commission). The
proposed fees are also in line with fees assessed by other exchanges,
for analogous connections.\13\ Further, the Exchange notes that an
affiliated options exchange and other exchanges that offer similar
pricing for similar or the same connections have a comparable, or even
lower, market share as the Exchange.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Supra notes 7 and 8.
\14\ See Cboe Global Markets U.S. Options Market Volume Summary
(August 20, 2024), available at <a href="https://markets.cboe.com/us/options/market_statistics/">https://markets.cboe.com/us/options/market_statistics/</a>. For example, the Exchange's affiliate Cboe BZX
Options Exchange represents approximately 4% of the market share,
BOX Options has a market share of approximately 6% and Nasdaq
Options Market has a market share of approximately 5% compared to
the Exchange's approximate 7% market share.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, the Exchange believes the proposed fee increase is
reasonable in light of recent and anticipated connectivity-related
upgrades and changes. The Exchange and its affiliated exchanges
recently launched a multi-year initiative to improve Cboe Exchange
Platform performance and capacity requirements, including for its U.S.
options markets, to increase competitiveness, support growth and
advance a consistent world class platform. The goal of the project,
among other things, is to provide faster and more consistent order
handling and matching performance for options, while ensuring quicker
processing time and supporting increasing volumes. For example, the
Exchange is currently performing order handler and matching engine
hardware upgrades across its markets to advance this goal. The Exchange
anticipates that upgrades to its matching engines may result in a
latency reduction up to 40% to 50% on the Exchange and that upgrades to
its order handlers may offer lower variability in the processing of
message, which can reduce the time a message takes to get to the
matching engine. The Exchange expended, and will continue to expend,
resources to innovate and modernize technology so that it may benefit
its Members and continue to compete among other options markets. The
Exchange also notes that neither it--nor its options exchange
affiliates--have passed through or offset current or projected costs
associated with these upgrades. The ability to continue to innovate
with technology and offer new products to market participants allows
the Exchange to remain competitive in the options space which currently
has 18 options markets and potential new entrants. The Exchange also
notes market participants may continue to choose the method of
connectivity based on their specific needs, and no broker-dealer is
required to become a Member of, let alone connect directly to, the
Exchange. There is also no regulatory requirement that any market
participant connect to any one particular exchange. Market participants
may voluntarily choose to become a member of one or more of a number of
different exchanges, of which, the Exchange is but one choice.
Additionally, any Exchange member that is dissatisfied with the
proposal is free to choose not to be a member of the Exchange and send
order flow to another exchange. Moreover, direct connectivity is not a
requirement to participate on the Exchange. The Exchange also believes
substitutable products and services are available to market
participants, including, among other things, other options exchanges to
which a market participant may connect in lieu of the Exchange and/or
trading of any options product, such as within the Over-the-Counter
(OTC) markets, which do not require connectivity to the Exchange.
Indeed, there are currently 18 registered options exchanges that trade
options (14 of which are not affiliated with Cboe), some of which have
similar or lower connectivity fees.\15\ Based on publicly available
information, no single options exchange has more than approximately 19%
of the market share and currently the Exchange represents only
approximately 7% of the market share.\16\ Further, low barriers to
entry mean that new exchanges may rapidly enter the market and offer
additional substitute platforms to further compete with the Exchange
and the products it offers. For example, there are 5 exchanges that
have been added in the U.S. options markets in the last 5 years (i.e.,
Nasdaq MRX, LLC, MIAX Pearl, LLC, MIAX Emerald LLC, MEMX LLC and most
recently MIAX Sapphire LLC).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ Supra note 7 and 8. See also NYSE American Options Fee
Schedule, Section V (Technology and System Access Fees), which has a
similar market share of 6% and offers lower fees for analogous
Logical Ports than proposed by the Exchange.
\16\ See Cboe Global Markets U.S. Options Market Volume Summary
(August 20, 2024), available at <a href="https://markets.cboe.com/us/options/market_statistics/">https://markets.cboe.com/us/options/market_statistics/</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As for market participants that determine to continue to maintain
membership or to join the Exchange for business purposes, those
business reasons presumably result in revenue capable of covering the
proposed fee. Further, for such market participants that choose to
connect to the Exchange, the Exchange believes the proposed fees
continue to provide flexibility with respect to how to connect to the
Exchange based on each market participants' respective business needs.
For example, the amount and type of logical ports are determined by
factors relevant and specific to each market participant, including its
business model, costs of connectivity, how its business is segmented
and allocated and volume of messages sent to the Exchange. Moreover,
the Exchange notes that it does not have unlimited system capacity and
the proposed fees are also designed to encourage market participants to
be efficient with their respective logical port usage and discourage
the purchasing of large amounts of superfluous ports. There is also no
requirement that any market participant maintain a specific number of
logical ports and a market participant may choose to maintain as many
or as few of such ports as each deems appropriate. Further, market
participants may reduce or discontinue use of these ports in response
to the proposed fees. Indeed, when the Exchange last increased pricing
for logical ports in 2018, the Exchange observed within the first two
months that market participants did in fact reduce the number of
logical ports they maintained. Particularly, Logical Port quantities
were reduced by approximately 20%. The Exchange similarly saw a decline
in logical port quantities after the current proposed rate change in
January 2024. Specifically, as of May 2024, Logical Port quantities
have been reduced by approximately 8% since the announcement of the
proposed fee change. This demonstrates that market participants can and
do choose to disconnect, or reduce, their connectivity from the
Exchange, including in response to fee increases. The Exchange also
does not assess any termination fee for a market participant to drop
its connectivity or membership, nor is the Exchange aware of any other
costs that
[[Page 74323]]
would be incurred by a market participant to do so.
As noted above, there is no regulatory requirement that any market
participant connect to any one options exchange, nor that any market
participant connect at a particular connection speed or act in a
particular capacity on the Exchange, or trade any particular product
offered on an exchange. Moreover, membership is not a requirement to
participate on the Exchange. Indeed, the Exchange is unaware of any one
options exchange whose membership includes every registered broker-
dealer. By way of example, while the Exchange has 51 members that trade
options, Cboe BZX has 61 members that trade options, and Cboe C2 has 52
Trading Permit Holders (``TPHs'') (i.e., members). There is also no
firm that is a Member of EDGX Options only. Further, based on
previously publicly available information regarding a sample of the
Exchange's competitors, NYSE American Options has 71 members,\17\ and
NYSE Arca Options has 69 members,\18\ MIAX Options has 46 members \19\
and MIAX Pearl Options has 40 members.\20\ Accordingly, excessive fees
would simply serve to reduce demand for these products, which market
participants are under no regulatory obligation to utilize.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ See <a href="https://www.nyse.com/markets/american-options/membership#directory">https://www.nyse.com/markets/american-options/membership#directory</a>.
\18\ See <a href="https://www.nyse.com/markets/arca-options/membership#directory">https://www.nyse.com/markets/arca-options/membership#directory</a>.
\19\ See <a href="https://www.miaxglobal.com/sites/default/files/page-files/MIAX_Options_Exchange_Members_April_2023_04282023.pdf">https://www.miaxglobal.com/sites/default/files/page-files/MIAX_Options_Exchange_Members_April_2023_04282023.pdf</a>.
\20\ See <a href="https://www.miaxglobal.com/sites/default/files/page-files/MIAX_Pearl_Exchange_Members_01172023_0.pdf">https://www.miaxglobal.com/sites/default/files/page-files/MIAX_Pearl_Exchange_Members_01172023_0.pdf</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange lastly notes that it is not required by the Exchange
Act, nor any other rule or regulation, to undertake a cost-of-service
or rate-making approach with respect to fee proposals. Moreover,
Congress's intent in enacting the 1975 Amendments to the Act was to
enable competition--rather than government order--to determine prices.
The principal purpose of the amendments was to facilitate the creation
of a national market system for the trading of securities. Congress
intended that this ``national market system evolve through the
interplay of competitive forces as unnecessary regulatory restrictions
are removed.'' \21\ Other provisions of the Act confirm that intent.
For example, the Act provides that an exchange must design its rules
``to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open
market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect
investors and the public interest.'' \22\ Likewise, the Act grants the
Commission authority to amend or repeal ``[t]he rules of [an] exchange
[that] impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of this chapter.'' \23\ In short, the
promotion of free and open competition was a core congressional
objective in creating the national market system.\24\ Indeed, the
Commission has historically interpreted that mandate to promote
competitive forces to determine prices whenever compatible with a
national market system. Accordingly, the Exchange believes it has met
its burden to demonstrate that its proposed fee change is reasonable
and consistent with the immediate filing process chosen by Congress,
which created a system whereby market forces determine access fees in
the vast majority of cases, subject to oversight only in particular
cases of abuse or market failure. The Exchange also believes that, even
if it were possible as a matter of economic theory, cost-based pricing
for the proposed fee would be so complicated that it could not be done
practically. Indeed, the Exchange believes that classification of costs
could likely not be done without on-going debate over formulas for
allocation,\25\ continual auditing, and considerable expense. The
Exchange also believes cost-based analysis could create disincentives
to reduce costs through efficient operation or innovation. Moreover,
the industry could experience frequent rate increases based on
escalating expense levels. The Exchange lastly cautions that as
disputes arise regarding the appropriate measure and calculation of
relevant costs and allocation of common costs, the Commission could
find itself engaging in the kind of rigid ratemaking not contemplated
by Section 11A of the Exchange Act and which the Commission has
historically sought to avoid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ See H.R. Rep. No. 94-229, at 92 (1975) (Conf. Rep.)
(emphasis added)
\22\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
\23\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(8).
\24\ See also 15 U.S.C. 78k-l(a)(1)(C)(ii) (purposes of Exchange
Act include to promote ``fair competition among brokers and dealers,
among exchange markets, and between exchange markets and markets
other than exchange markets''); Order, 73 FR 74781 (``The Exchange
Act and its legislative history strongly support the Commission's
reliance on competition, whenever possible, in meeting its
regulatory responsibilities for overseeing the SROs and the national
market system.'').
\25\ See, e.g., letter from Brian Sopinsky, General Counsel,
Susquehanna International Group, LLP (``SIG''), to Vanessa
Countryman, Secretary, Commission, dated February 7, 2023, letters
from Gerald D. O'Connell, SIG, to Vanessa Countryman, Secretary,
Commission, dated March 21, 2023, May 24, 2023, July 24, 2023 and
September 18, 2023, and letters from John C. Pickford, SIG, to
Vanessa Countryman, Secretary, Commission, dated January 4, 2024,
and March 1, 2024 and letters from Thomas M. Merritt, Deputy General
Counsel, Virtu Financial, Inc. (``Virtu''), to Vanessa Countryman,
Secretary, Commission, dated November 8, 2023 and January 2, 2024.
See also Securities Exchange Act Release No. 93883 (December 30,
2021), 87 FR 523 (January 5, 2022) (SR-IEX-2021-14) (Suspension of
and Order Instituting Proceedings To Determine Whether To Approve or
Disapprove a Proposed Rule Change To Amend Its Fee Schedule for
Market Data Fees) and Securities Exchange Act Release No. 94888 (May
11, 2022), 87 FR 29892 (May 17, 2022) (SR-PEARL-2022-18) (Notice of
Filing of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend the MIAX PEARL Options Fee
Schedule To Increase Certain Connectivity Fees and To Increase the
Monthly Fees for MIAX Express Network Full Service Port; Suspension
of and Order Instituting Proceedings To Determine Whether To Approve
or Disapprove the Proposed Rule Change).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exchange also believes that the proposed fee change is not
unfairly discriminatory because it would be assessed uniformly across
all market participants that purchase the respective logical ports. All
Members have the option to select any connectivity option, and there is
no differentiation among Members with regard to the fees charged for
the services offered by the Exchange.
B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange believes the
proposed fee change will not impact intramarket competition because it
will apply to all similarly situated market participants equally (i.e.,
all market participants that choose to purchase the relevant logical
ports).
The Exchange believes the proposed fees will not impact intermarket
competition because they are also in line with, or even lower than some
fees for similar connectivity on other exchanges, and therefore may
stimulate intermarket competition by attracting additional firms to
connect to the Exchange or at least should not deter interested
participants from connecting directly to the Exchange. Further, if the
changes proposed herein are unattractive to market participants, the
Exchange can, and likely will, see a decline in usage of these ports as
a result. The Exchange operates in a highly competitive market in which
market participants can determine whether or not to connect directly to
the Exchange based on the value received compared to the cost of doing
so. Indeed, market participants have numerous alternative venues that
they may participate on and direct their order flow, including 13 (soon
to be 14) non-Cboe affiliated options markets, as well as off-exchange
venues, where
[[Page 74324]]
competitive products are available for trading. Moreover, the
Commission has repeatedly expressed its preference for competition over
regulatory intervention in determining prices, products, and services
in the securities markets. Specifically, in Regulation NMS, the
Commission highlighted the importance of market forces in determining
prices and SRO revenues and, also, recognized that current regulation
of the market system ``has been remarkably successful in promoting
market competition in its broader forms that are most important to
investors and listed companies.'' \26\ The fact that this market is
competitive has also long been recognized by the courts. In
NetCoalition v. Securities and Exchange Commission, the D.C. Circuit
stated as follows: ``[n]o one disputes that competition for order flow
is `fierce.' . . . As the SEC explained, `[i]n the U.S. national market
system, buyers and sellers of securities, and the broker-dealers that
act as their order-routing agents, have a wide range of choices of
where to route orders for execution'; [and] `no exchange can afford to
take its market share percentages for granted' because `no exchange
possesses a monopoly, regulatory or otherwise, in the execution of
order flow from broker dealers' . . . .''.\27\ Accordingly, the
Exchange does not believe its proposed change imposes any burden on
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005).
\27\ NetCoalition v. SEC, 615 F.3d 525, 539 (D.C. Cir. 2010)
(quoting Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59039 (December 2,
2008), 73 FR 74770, 74782-83 (December 9, 2008) (SR-NYSEArca-2006-
21)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others
The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposed rule change.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \28\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 \29\
thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed
rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission will institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or
disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
\29\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Solicitation of Comments
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:
Electronic Comments
<bullet> Use the Commission's internet comment form (<a href="https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml">https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml</a>); or
<bullet> Send an email to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#c3b1b6afa6eea0acaeaea6adb7b083b0a6a0eda4acb5"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="443631282169272b2929212a3037043721276a232b32">[email protected]</span></a>. Please include
file number SR-CboeEDGX-2024-055 on the subject line.
Paper Comments
<bullet> Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.
All submissions should refer to file number SR-CboeEDGX-2024-055. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (<a href="https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml">https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml</a>). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. Do not
include personal identifiable information in submissions; you should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. We
may redact in part or withhold entirely from publication submitted
material that is obscene or subject to copyright protection.
All submissions should refer to file number SR-CboeEDGX-2024-055
and should be submitted on or before October 3, 2024.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2024-20633 Filed 9-11-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on September 12, 2024.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.